Task 2 · by section

Task 2 introduction — the words this part of the exam actually needs

This is the language for one job: it restates the prompt in your own words and says, without hedging into invisibility, where you stand. The first two or three sentences of every Task 2 essay. It is where the examiner decides whether you understood the question, and where most responses either copy the prompt or forget to answer it.

The long versionwhat it is, what it costs, where it stops

19 entriesin 4 groups, each with its pattern

Guided practice3 steps, you write, then you compare

3 exercisesevery wrong option explains itself

Start here · the long version

What task 2 introduction really asks you to write

A Task 2 introduction does two jobs with different vocabulary: it restates the question without reusing its words, and it commits to an answer at a strength you are prepared to defend.

Two jobs, and the second is the one that gets forgotten

Restating the prompt is the job everyone knows about. Stating a position is the one that quietly disappears, usually because the writer intends to explain their view in the body and treats the introduction as scene-setting. The result is an essay that reads as a survey of opinions with no author in it — and Task Response is assessed partly on whether a clear position is present throughout, which means it has to be visible from the opening.

The vocabulary for the two jobs is genuinely different, and mixing them is what produces the vaguest introductions. Restating needs reporting language: “it is often argued that”, “some maintain that”. Positioning needs commitment language: “this essay will argue”, “I largely agree”. Using reporting verbs to state your own view — “it could be said that education is important” — produces a sentence that belongs to nobody.

Strength is the other half of the problem. English gives you a full range between “I completely agree” and “I disagree to some extent”, and the one you choose is a promise about the rest of the essay. Choosing the strongest available position feels decisive and is usually a mistake: a total agreement leaves you nothing to concede, and a body paragraph that concedes anything then contradicts your own introduction.

Reporting language

“it is often argued that”, “proponents maintain that”. For the view you are about to answer — not for your own.

Commitment language

“this essay will argue”, “I largely agree that”. For your position, and it belongs in the introduction.

Strength is a promise

“Largely agree” leaves room to concede. “Completely agree” does not, and your Body 2 will need some.

No new content

The introduction does not argue. Reasons belong in the body; putting them here empties the paragraphs that need them.

The register question nobody resolves

Whether to write “I” in a Task 2 essay is asked constantly and has a boring answer: it is allowed, it is common in high-scoring responses, and it is not required. What is not allowed is the mixture — an essay that opens with “In my opinion” and then switches to “it can be seen that” for the rest has changed its own voice halfway through, which is a Coherence problem.

The impersonal alternatives are worth knowing regardless, because they carry a different weight. “This essay will argue that” commits without the personal frame; “there are strong grounds for” commits to the reasoning rather than to the writer. Both let you state a position at full strength while keeping the register uniformly academic.

What it costs you to skip this

An introduction with no position costs on Task Response directly, and it costs again indirectly: an essay that never committed cannot be consistent with itself, so the conclusion has nothing to restate. And a position taken at the wrong strength is worse than a weak one — a “completely agree” that the body then qualifies reads as a writer who changed their mind halfway and did not go back.

Where it stops applying

The introduction does not argue and does not give reasons. Naming your two reasons here is the commonest way to leave Body 1 and Body 2 with nothing new to say, and it is often mistaken for good signposting. It also does not need a “hook”: a general opening sentence about how important the topic is adds no content, and the examiner is reading for the restatement and the position, both of which it delays.

Examples · why precise words score better

The same sentence, twice

Lexical Resource is not a count of long words: it assesses range, precision and control. The fastest way to see that is to watch one sentence become precise. Nothing was added below except accuracy.

Vague

Nowadays many people think that university should be free. In my opinion, I think this is a good idea because it helps students.

Task 2 introduction

Precise

It is frequently argued that higher education should be publicly funded. This essay will contend that free access is justified, though not without conditions.

“Nowadays many people think” is the opening every examiner reads fifty times a day, and “I think this is a good idea because it helps students” both states a position and spends Body 1’s reason on it. The precise version reports the view, commits to an answer, and signals a qualification without arguing it yet.

What the precise version earns
precision · register · range. No page here promises anyone a score: these are the things the criterion looks at, and they are the things you can control.

The bank · grouped by the job each word does

19 entries, and the pattern each one demands

Knowing a word and not its pattern is what produces a sentence that reads like a translation. The preposition, the verb form and the article are the part that carries the marks.

Restating the prompt

Reporting language, for the view you are about to answer.

It is frequently argued that

Safe to use

Takes a clause. Impersonal, and it attributes the view without inventing a source.

A common view is that

Safe to use

Takes a clause. Slightly lighter than “frequently argued” and equally neutral.

Proponents of X maintain that

Safe to use

Names who holds the view, then a clause. The clearest option in a discussion essay.

There is a widespread belief that

Watch the pattern

Takes a clause. Only when the belief really is widespread — you cannot verify “widespread”.

Nowadays, many people think that

Costs you marks

Grammatical, and it is the single most common opening in the exam. It reports nothing that “it is argued that” does not.

Stating your position

Commitment language. This is the sentence that must not be missing.

This essay will argue that

Safe to use

Takes a clause. Commits at full strength without the personal frame.

I largely agree that

Safe to use

Takes a clause. “Largely” leaves room for the concession your body will need.

While X, this essay contends that Y

Safe to use

A concession clause first, then the position. Signals a qualified answer in one sentence.

There are strong grounds for

Watch the pattern

Takes a noun or an -ing form: “strong grounds for restricting”, never “for restrict”.

In my opinion, I think that

Costs you marks

Says the same thing twice. One or the other, never both.

Calibrating the strength

The word you choose here is a promise about the whole essay.

entirely / completely

Watch the pattern

Before the verb: “entirely agree”. Leaves you nothing to concede, so only use it if the body really concedes nothing.

largely / broadly

Safe to use

Before the verb. The safest position in most essays: committed, with room to qualify.

to a certain extent

Watch the pattern

Ends the clause: “I agree to a certain extent”. Useful once; a whole essay of it has no position.

while acknowledging that

Safe to use

Takes a clause. Concedes and commits in the same sentence, which is what a qualified answer looks like.

partly … but

Safe to use

Two halves, both needed. “I partly agree, but the evidence points the other way.”

Naming the ground without arguing it

You can point at the territory. You cannot start crossing it here.

on both economic and social grounds

Safe to use

Takes “on … grounds”. Names the kind of reason without giving the reason.

with certain reservations

Safe to use

Ends the sentence. Signals a qualification the body will supply.

though not without conditions

Safe to use

A closing phrase after a comma. Same job, slightly more formal.

for two reasons: firstly …

Costs you marks

Spends Body 1 and Body 2 in the introduction. It looks like signposting and empties the paragraphs.

Watch two · then the mistakes

The words doing their job in a real sentence

Worked example · It is frequently argued · This essay will contend · though not without conditions

It is frequently argued that higher education should be publicly funded. This essay will contend that free access is justified, though not without conditions.

Why it works: Two sentences doing the two jobs cleanly: one reports the view, the other commits to an answer. The closing phrase promises a qualification without spending it.

Worked example · While … undoubtedly · this essay contends

While remote working undoubtedly offers flexibility, this essay contends that its costs to junior employees have been consistently understated.

Why it works: A concession and a position in one sentence. Conceding first makes the position read as considered rather than reflexive, and it does it without giving away a body paragraph.

Nowadays many people think that cars should be banned in city centres. In my opinion, I think this is a good idea.

The most common opening in the exam, followed by a doubled first person. “In my opinion” and “I think” say the same thing, and neither commits to anything specific.

Repaired: It is frequently argued that private cars should be excluded from city centres. This essay will argue that such a ban is justified in the largest cities.

I completely agree with this statement for two reasons: firstly, it saves money, and secondly, it reduces pollution.

Two problems. “Completely” leaves nothing to concede, and both body paragraphs have just been spent in the introduction.

Repaired: I largely agree with this statement, on both economic and environmental grounds.

Now you try · with the scaffolding on

Build it one step at a time

Write a two-sentence introduction: one restating, one positioning. No reasons.

The material

Prompt: “Some people believe that governments should invest in public transport rather than in new roads. To what extent do you agree or disagree?”

Step 1Restate the prompt with reporting language

Move every content word you can and keep it a reported view. “Some people believe” is the paper’s phrasing.

Your version0 words · minimum 10

10 more words before you can compare. Writing it yourself first is the whole exercise.

Step 2Commit to a position, at a strength you can defend

Step 3Check what you have NOT written

Exercises · production

Choose the word that does the job and takes the right pattern

Every wrong option is wrong for its own reason, and it says so. Nothing here is scored automatically.

______ that social media has damaged face-to-face communication.

Choose an option first

Your body paragraphs will concede one exception. Which position should the introduction take?

Choose an option first

There are strong grounds ______ the sale of single-use plastics.

Choose an option first

The rest of the vocabulary

Where else these words are needed

Task 1 introduction

It restates what the visual shows, without reusing the words printed above it.

21 entries · 3 exercises Task 1 overview

It states the two or three biggest things the visual shows, without a single figure.

20 entries · 3 exercises Trends over time

It reports change over time: the direction, how big it was, and how fast it happened.

31 entries · 3 exercises Comparisons

It states how two or more things differ, and by how much.

22 entries · 3 exercises Processes

It reports a sequence of stages in order, with the doer left out because nobody is named.

22 entries · 3 exercises Maps

It reports what changed in a place, and exactly where.

22 entries · 3 exercises Body paragraphs

It opens a paragraph with one claim, develops it into a chain, and supports it without inventing sources.

21 entries · 3 exercises Task 2 conclusion

It restates the position in different words and closes without introducing anything new.

19 entries · 3 exercises Final revision

It names what to hunt for in the last five minutes, and what to put in its place.

20 entries · 3 exercises